Rodrigo Cardoso (p), Evert Meijers

Rüdiger Hamm

This paper discusses whether the areas where metropolitan integration can be beneficial for cities in general correspond to the typical areas of disadvantage of many second-tier cities in Europe. It explores the implications of that convergence, namely and how integration can contribute to overcome the setbacks experienced by many second-tier cities. We define metropolitan integration as a process entailing a functional-spatial, a political-institutional and a symbolic-cultural dimension. Its potential advantages include capturing the agglomeration benefits emerging from the aggregate metropolitan size, such as increased functional performance; increasing regional organising capacity to deploy existing metropolitan resources; and acquiring greater political-institutional influence over higher-level policymaking. Research about the different contexts and prospects of second-tier cities across Europe shows that many face persistent disadvantages in comparison to first-tier cities (usually large capitals): little capacity to exploit agglomeration benefits based on size and functions, neglect in the reception of national public investment, and weak political influence at higher policy levels. We contribute to the discussion of new strategies of second-tier city development by exploring the potential effect of metropolitan integration on these setbacks. We start by empirically assessing the gains in demographic and functional mass that second-tier cities experience by aggregating the metropolitan scale, and then draw lessons from various examples to illustrate their interest in increasing institutional and political capacity. Metropolitan region formation seems indeed a relevant strategy for many second-tier cities, most prominently for those embedded in large and dense urban territories, and located in countries where a first-tier city dominates the economic and political life. To mobilise this potential, the paper concludes with a discussion about the planning and governance strategies which manage the opportunities and hurdles of the process in order to realize the benefits of integration.

Michael Bentlage (p), Fabian Wenner, Alain Thierstein

Rodrigo Cardoso

See extended abstract

Evert Meijers (p), Marloes Hoogerbrugge, Rodrigo Cardoso

Michael Bentlage

A quarter of the European population lives in ‘Polycentric Urban Regions’ (PURs): clusters of historically and administratively distinct but proximate and well-connected cities of relatively similar size. This paper explores whether tighter integration can increase agglomeration benefits at the PUR-level. We provide the first comprehensive list of European PURs (117 in total), establish their level of functional, institutional and cultural integration and measure whether this affects their performance. ‘Performance’ is defined as the extent to which agglomeration economies have developed, proxied by the presence of metropolitan functions. In this first-ever cross-sectional analysis of PURs we find that while there is evidence for all dimensions of integration having a positive effect, particularly functional integration has great significance. Regarding institutional integration, it appears that having some form of metropolitan cooperation is more important than its exact shape. Theoretically, our results substantiate the assumption that networks may substitute for proximity.